All,

John Curran, ARIN CEO, just shared next step on arin-ppml mailing list,
and let me share it as I could not find better source.
(Sorry, I don't have any intension to quote it)

http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2014-March/028006.html

And, we need to reply feedback before "Mar 27th, 2014" which means this
THURSDAY!!
However, I have not yet understood what we need to give a feedback for.
Does somebody know it?

http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/iana/functions-transfer-process-14m
ar14-en.pdf

My first comment for this is "It's too urgent.  ICANN should not push other
internet orgs to do anything."

Rgs,
Masato Yamanishi


On 14/03/22 20:16, "Tony Smith" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Naresh
> 
> Sorry, to answer your earlier question about "plans" - the plan is something
> that APNIC, our community, and all interested Internet users worldwide have
> been prompted to contribute to as per the NTIA announcement (which asked ICANN
> to facilitate).  
> 
> Paul's email from Friday (available here:
> http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2014/iana-globalization-consultation-pr
> ocess) explained the next steps.
> 
> Everyone - including the Secretariat! - is hoping to find out more at ICANN 49
> in Singapore.  We hope there will be discussion at the meeting on how this
> process is going to work and the community will have some input into the
> mechanics of the consultation process.  ICANN changed the program just today
> with an updated time for its discussion session - it is now at 10.30am SG time
> on Monday:  
> http://singapore49.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-globalization-advisory
> 
> As Paul's email said, the APNIC EC is currently considering the best ways to
> facilitate discussions and capture input from the Asia Pacific community.  It
> would be great to hear your and other Members' views on how the APNIC
> community can contribute to this process.
> 
> Kind regards
> Tony
> 
> From: Naresh Ajwani <[email protected]>
> Date: Sunday, 23 March 2014 10:19 am
> To: MAEMURA Akinori <[email protected]>
> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress
> 
> Maemura, hi
> 
> Masato; Do you mean that DG had signed it before consulting EC nor members as
>> > there was not enough time?
>> > Does it comply with APNIC by-laws 54? It says;
> Maemura; "I am sure he has been in full touch with the EC to proceed these
> issues and signed them under the EC's authorization."
> 
> Is it  part of any Munute of Meeting or mails and if in public domain?
> 
> Transparency wud help more. I am still waiting for the plans if any, I had
> asked for in this thread mails
> 
> Regards & best wishes
> 
> Naresh Ajwani
> 
> On 23 Mar 2014 06:37, "MAEMURA Akinori" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Masato,
>> 
>> 
>> (2014/03/21 11:18), Masato Yamanishi wrote:
>>> > Maemura-san and EC members,
>>> >
>>> > Thank you for sharing EC's view.
>>> > Let me quote your statement in slightly different order to make my
>>> comment.
>>> >
>>>> >> Technically speaking on the basis of our governing provisions,
>>>> >> the Executive Council has function to act on behalf of the Members
>>>> >> in the interval between AGMs, and to manage the activities, functions
>>>> >> and affairs of APNIC.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> More practically, the EC represents the Membership to manage APNIC's
>>>> >> activity,
>>>> >> and need to comply the will of the Membership, sometimes with the
>>>> >> broader community.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We have the power to authorise the activity by DG and Secretariat for
>>>> >> the Membership,
>>>> >> but need to synchronise our thought on the authorization with the
>>>> >> Membership.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> That is why we set a timeslot to discuss the Internet Governance issue
>>>> >> in the AMM this time,
>>>> >> after we announced our support for Montevideo Statement in January.
>>> >
>>> > It complies with APNIC by-laws 30, so I don't see any problem from
>>> > procedure perspective.
>> Yes, as you see the wording in my message was in accordance with it.
>> 
>>> > BUT,
>>> >
>>>> >> Montevideo Statement was crafted among the I* CEOs in the situation, as
>>>> >> Tony has already told,
>>>> >> with very limited time allowance with very quick moves at that time,
>>>> >> and so was the I*'s reaction to NTIA statement.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Do you mean that DG had signed it before consulting EC nor members as
>>> > there was not enough time?
>>> > Does it comply with APNIC by-laws 54? It says;
>> I am sure he has been in full touch with the EC to proceed these issues and
>> signed them under the EC's authorization.
>> 
>> Akinori
>>> > 54. The main functions of the Director General are:
>>> >   a. to act as the chief executive officer of APNIC and the corporation;
>>> >   b. to have, subject to the provisions of these by-laws and to the
>>> > direction of the Executive Council, the responsibility for the general
>>> > management and control of the activities, functions and affairs of APNIC
>>> > and the corporation and shall perform all duties and have all powers which
>>> > are commonly incident to the office of chief executive or which are
>>> > delegated by the Executive Council;
>>> >   c. to execute all contracts, agreements and other instruments of the
>>> > corporation which are authorised including affixing the Seal of the
>>> > corporation;
>>> >   d. to appoint and have general supervision and direction of all of the
>>> > other staff and agents of APNIC and the corporation, including but not
>>> > limited to bookkeeping, accounting and treasury functions on behalf of the
>>> > Treasurer;
>>> >   e. to implement strategic policies, prepare plans for APNIC, and shall
>>> > coordinate its activities, functions and affairs;
>>> >   f. to report to the Executive Council and to put forward resolutions for
>>> > the consideration of the Executive Council;
>>> >   g. to take all the actions required to ensure the economic use of
>>> > APNIC's resources and shall be responsible to the Executive Council for
>>> > all the administrative and financial aspects of APNIC's activities;
>>> >   h. to act as the legal representative of APNIC and the corporation;
>>> >   i. to act as an ex-officio member of the Executive Council.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Rgs,
>>> > Masato Yamanishi
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 14/03/19 0:12, "MAEMURA Akinori" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>>> >> Dear Masato, Pranesh and everyone,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I know this is very late response for your request for the EC to
>>>> clarify.
>>>> >> Apologies.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> At Mon, 17 Mar 2014 15:41:35 -0700
>>>> >> In message <cf4cc73d.85d7d%[email protected]
>>>> <mailto:cf4cc73d.85d7d%[email protected]> >
>>>> >>   "Re: [apnic-talk] IANA Globalization Progress"
>>>> >>   "Masato Yamanishi <[email protected]>" wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> | Pranesh and All,
>>>> >> |
>>>> >> | While I'm not new to APNIC, I have same question/concern.
>>>> >> | Can EC clarify it?
>>>> >> |
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Montevideo Statement was crafted among the I* CEOs in the situation, as
>>>> >> Tony has already told, with very limited time allowance with very quick
>>>> >> moves at that time, and so was the I*'s reaction to NTIA statement.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Technically speaking on the basis of our governing provisions, the
>>>> >> Executive Council has function to act on behalf of the Members in the
>>>> >> interval between AGMs, and to manage the activities, functions and
>>>> >> affairs of APNIC.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> More practically, the EC represents the Membership to manage APNIC's
>>>> >> activity, and need to comply the will of the Membership, sometimes with
>>>> >> the broader community.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> We have the power to authorise the activity by DG and Secretariat for
>>>> the
>>>> >> Membership, but need to synchronise our thought on the authorization
>>>> with
>>>> >> the Membership.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> That is why we set a timeslot to discuss the Internet Governance issue
in
>>>> >> the AMM this time, after we announced our support for Montevideo
>>>> >> Statement in January.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It was great to see very active discussion there, and that it triggered
>>>> >> the continued discussion on line.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> As Masato points out, now Paul is more engaged in the activity of
>>>> >> coordination among our fellow organizations and ITU arena, which is
>>>> based
>>>> >> on the EC's authorization.  We authorize becuase we think it needed.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I understand it looks like politics game with little thing, if not
>>>> >> nothing, to do with Members' own business.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> However from the viewpoint of a company whose business is serving
>>>> >> community with Internet Resource, one of which is APNIC, it is really
>>>> >> important to address the risk of unwanted non-viable arrangement and to
>>>> >> have people with other stakes understand our position.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Moreover, as already mentioned, the forthcoming couple of years are
>>>> quite
>>>> >> crucial stage for us to keep our healthy business environment.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> That's why we authorize these activities by Secretariat, and what we
>>>> need
>>>> >> to have you understand.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> As we have many things to come, Director General and the EC will have
>>>> >> more communication each other to consider these actions, than we have
>>>> >> already been doing.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I know, through my own business, that how Internet Governance issues are
>>>> >> difficult for people (e.g. of tech community) to realize,  I am still on
>>>> >> the way to find how I can couple the issue we confront adequately with
>>>> >> community's interest.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The EC needs to have the Membership's support with well-informed
>>>> consent,
>>>> >> and of course we need to change our thought just in case we found it was
>>>> >> not of the Membership and community, and I hope the current discussion
>>>> >> will valuable for the purpose.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Sincerely,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> MAEMURA Akinori, my own hat on, but I am sure the EC well sheres these
>>>> >> points
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> | Rgs,
>>>> >> | Masato Yamanishi
>>>> >> |
>>>> >> |
>>>> >> |
>>>> >> | On 14/03/14 23:01, "Pranesh Prakash" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> >> |
>>>> >> | >Tony Smith [2014-03-14 21:42]:
>>>> >> | >> As I'm sure you appreciate, the news from the US has just arrived
>>>> >> this
>>>> >> | >>morning and a lot of the details are still coming to light. We're
>>>> >> | >>planning to prepare something that explains what this development
>>>> >> means
>>>> >> | >>in more detail when more information is confirmed.
>>>> >> | >
>>>> >> | >I'm sorry, but I'm new to APNIC's lists.
>>>> >> | >
>>>> >> | >Was there any consultation within APNIC before APNIC's leader's name
>>>> >> was
>>>> >> | >added to this statement?  Could you also point me towards the
>>>> community
>>>> >> | >consultation / mailing list discussions that took place before the
>>>> >> | >Montevideo Declaration was signed as something APNIC endorsed?
>>>> >> | >
>>>> >> | >> But for now, we wanted to alert everyone to this news and the fact
>>>> >> | >>consultation will begin in our region in Singapore.
>>>> >> | >
>>>> >> | >Could you outline the intra-APNIC consultations (i.e., not the ICANN
>>>> >> | >consultations about which ICANN's published a document) that will
>>>> take
>>>> >> | >place with regard to this?  Which mailing list will these discussions
>>>> >> be
>>>> >> | >directed towards?
>>>> >> | >
>>>> >> | >--
>>>> >> | >Pranesh Prakash
>>>> >> | >Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society
>>>> >> | >T: +91 80 40926283 <tel:%2B91%2080%2040926283>  | W:
>>>> http://cis-india.org
>>>> >> | >-------------------
>>>> >> | >Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law
>>>> >> School
>>>> >> | >M: +1 520 314 7147 <tel:%2B1%20520%20314%207147>  | W:
>>>> http://yaleisp.org
>>>> >> | >PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash
>>>> >> | >
>>>> >> |
>>>> >> |
>>>> >> | _______________________________________________
>>>> >> | apnic-talk mailing list
>>>> >> | [email protected]
>>>> >> | http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
>>>> >> |
>>> >
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> apnic-talk mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
> _______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk


_______________________________________________
apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk

Reply via email to